Nowhere is it specified what colour the lamp should be, only that there should be one burning (in our parish its electric, put in when a former pastor feared an increase in insurance rates). Red only makes it more visible.I need some clarification. When our pastor arrived at the parish last year, he had the sanctuary lamp (I hope that is the correct name, it is the candle next to the Tabernacle), changed from a red glass to clear. Is this correct? He insists that it is, but I don’t remember ever seeing anything but red in other parishes.
Thanks for your help.
No color is specified. Only that it must be a living flame, in other words NOT an electric lamp.I need some clarification. When our pastor arrived at the parish last year, he had the sanctuary lamp (I hope that is the correct name, it is the candle next to the Tabernacle), changed from a red glass to clear. Is this correct? He insists that it is, but I don’t remember ever seeing anything but red in other parishes.
Thanks for your help.
GIRM 316. In accordance with traditional custom, near the tabernacle a special lamp, fueled by oil or wax, should be kept alight to indicate and honor the presence of Christ.Nowhere is it specified what colour the lamp should be, only that there should be one burning (in our parish its electric, put in when a former pastor feared an increase in insurance rates). Red only makes it more visible.
I think that’s an important point. (About the word “should”, that is.) If the wording was “must never use anything but” then using electric “flames” would be a true abuse. But “should” does imply that this is important and there better be a very good reason to do something different.GIRM 316. In accordance with traditional custom, near the tabernacle a special lamp, fueled by oil or wax, should be kept alight to indicate and honor the presence of Christ.
(I guess the wiggle word there is “should” rather than “must.”)
Other than the use of “should”, the instruction is very clear that traditional custom includes a sanctuary (or “presence”) lamp. The same custom applies to both East and West.I think that’s an important point. (About the word “should”, that is.) If the wording was “must never use anything but” then using electric “flames” would be a true abuse. But “should” does imply that this is important and there better be a very good reason to do something different.
There are some places where the fire departments have the authority to shut down places that use live flames.
“Freedom of religion” is not the law everywhere and is not honored everywhere that it supposedly applies.
Sometimes we try and read too much into that wording. In this case I believe that it means due care is to be taken to insure that it stays lit, however no harn if it goes out for short periods of time between refuelings. I don’t believe that it is intended to imply it is optional.GIRM 316. In accordance with traditional custom, near the tabernacle a special lamp, fueled by oil or wax, should be kept alight to indicate and honor the presence of Christ.
(I guess the wiggle word there is “should” rather than “must.”)
Then the answer in my opinion is not to reserve the Blessed Sacrament in a public access tabernacle in the main body of the Church. Instead reserve it in the priests private chapel.Other than the use of “should”, the instruction is very clear that traditional custom includes a sanctuary (or “presence”) lamp. The same custom applies to both East and West.
IMHO, I imagine that “should” is used in the instruction precisely because of the presence of fire laws in some places as well the fact that “freedom of religion" is not the law everywhere and is not honored everywhere that it supposedly applies.”.
In spite of the “should,” the instruction is also clear as to what a sanctuary (or “presence”) lamp should be. I would venture here that the only way an electric light could substitute for oil or wax is if the local fire laws absolutely and absolutely forbid an unattended lamp. In which case, there is really no sanctuary (or “presence”) lamp anyway and we come back to what seems to me to be the reason for the subjunctive in the first place.
Very few – at least in the USA…I think that’s an important point. (About the word “should”, that is.) If the wording was “must never use anything but” then using electric “flames” would be a true abuse. But “should” does imply that this is important and there better be a very good reason to do something different.
**There are some places where the fire departments have the authority to shut down places that use live flames. **
“Freedom of religion” is not the law everywhere and is not honored everywhere that it supposedly applies.
Well said.Sometimes we try and read too much into that wording. In this case I believe that it means due care is to be taken to insure that it stays lit, however no harn if it goes out for short periods of time between refuelings. I don’t believe that it is intended to imply it is optional.
Based on your previous comment, I presume you mean in those cases where fire laws and/or lack of religious liberty interfere with the use of a sanctuary lamp in a church according to the norms of tradition.Then the answer in my opinion is not to reserve the Blessed Sacrament in a public access tabernacle in the main body of the Church. Instead reserve it in the priests private chapel.
The language is crystal clear. You are wrong. You should be gracious or silent when your advice has been shown to be suspect.Sometimes we try and read too much into that wording. In this case I believe that it means due care is to be taken to insure that it stays lit, however no harn if it goes out for short periods of time between refuelings. I don’t believe that it is intended to imply it is optional.
Oh My, don’t like it when someone disagrees with you?The language is crystal clear. You are wrong. You should be gracious or silent when your advice has been shown to be suspect.
I don’t think we are talking about an Eastern Church here.Very few – at least in the USA…
Citizens don’t like the gov’t sticking their nose into such matters. Here in California we have to get a permit and it’s inspected (no nearby flammables, etc.) but I don’t think they would dare tell the Catholic Church “no” as that would be front page stuff once they tried to shut-down a church.
Interestingly enough, my Byzantine/Ruthenian Catholic bishop SPECIFIED an electric light in place of the open flame when he approved my parish’s remodeling plans.
Years ago the local FD tried to shut down a Christmas eve Mass here locally because the church was standing room only – against the walls, some in the aisles, etc. The following Monday the pastor had a brief sit-down with the FD chief. It’s never happened again…
Yes, of course. The Blessed Sacrament should always be available to the Faithful for private prayer where possible. Sadly many parish churches are now locked even during the day with the tabernacle inside, locked away from the faithful.Well said.
Based on your previous comment, I presume you mean in those cases where fire laws and/or lack of religious liberty interfere with the use of a sanctuary lamp in a church according to the norms of tradition.
GIRM:It need not be a real flame based on the GIRM,
The GIRM calls for the lamp to be fueled by oil or wax. Imho, this seems to imply the need for a oil lamp or a candle both of have a live flame.GIRM 316. In accordance with traditional custom, near the tabernacle a special lamp, fueled by oil or wax, should be kept alight to indicate and honor the presence of Christ.
Read it closer:The GIRM calls for the lamp to be fueled by oil or wax. Imho, this seems to imply the need for a oil lamp or a candle both of have a live flame.